The Ames Straw Poll. I doubt Congressman Paul will win.
In: perspective, proportion
By Mark Kilmer Posted in 2008 — Comments (37) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
They're going to vote in Ames tomorrow. Yeah, $35 a pop.
Tommie Thompson says he has to finish second or third, else he'll reevaluate. Sam Brownback and Mike Huckabee each want to finish second. The FredHeads are putting something together on their own.
The story, though, is Mitt Romney. Romney has spent the most money and the most time in Iowa, and he should win this $35/vote straw poll big. He is expected to do so, and he is already booked on at least FOX News Sunday with Chris Wallace this weekend. Romney will win. It is difficult for a rational observer to imagine an at-all-likely scenario in which he does not.
Which is what surprised me about this. …
Bob Dole's old campaign '96 manager, a fellow named Scott Reed, has this to say about that:
"If Romney wins he's the undisputed champ," said Scott Reed, a GOP strategist who managed Bob Dole's 1996 campaign. "After this weekend, when Romney wins -- even if it's by 10 votes -- he's another step to being the candidate of the social conservatives."
What a strange thing to say.
Read on…
What Reed says may indeed be so, for unknowable reasons, but I'm not certain how a $35/vote "straw poll" in a small, Midwestern State translates into anything whatsoever to do with social conservatives How many of the people forking over the $35 to vote for Mitt Romney will be social conservatives? Will a Romney victory, even if it's by 10 votes, in a pay-for-play poll convince social conservatives with doubts that Mitt Romney is serious about his most recent positions on their issues. (Please note, Romney supporters, that I have no reason to publicly doubt what he's most recently said. There is a chance that he will be the Republican nominee, and I will not break Gaylord Parkinson's Law, which is better known as Reagan's Eleventh Commandment.)
Flip flops were an issue for Republicans in 2004. They have and possibly will be one in this year's GOP nominating process.
What about Scott Reed's flip-flops? Now he says that Romney is on his way to taking the social conservative vote for winning the pay-for-play poll in Iowa. In February, when discussing Romney's changing issue positions with US News and World Report, Scott Reed said this:
Voters can respect a politician who changes parties," says Republican strategist Scott Reed. "But it's more difficult for a politician that changes philosophies."
My own take?
The "straw poll" sounds like a fun event for Iowa Republicans and a nifty fundraiser for the Iowa GOP. If it helps a campaign with anything at all, it will be with fundraising. Neither Mitt Romney nor his pockets need any help with that.
I don't think it will winnow the field at all, though it may give some candidates a convenient excuse to thank their volunteers and go home to do something productive.
Romney will win the poll; depending on who finishes second and third, there will be other stories to concoct. I personally hope all participants have a good time, and it would be good for the Iowa GOP to raise lots and lots of cash. Win or lose, it won't matter. The political media of the mainstream variety will waste trees and air injecting whatever meaning into all this, but we'd all be better off if they would let the campaigns do that; we'll expect the spin, and it will reflect the politics of the poll.
In: perspective, proportion.
Then again, if Ron Paul pulls off an upset victory, we will have reevaluate if not the entire GOP field, then those who paid $35 to vote in this poll.
« Dueling June Obama fundraising claims? — Comments (2) | Game on in South Dakota. Who'll Run Against Tim Johnson? — Comments (21) »
The Ames Straw Poll. I doubt Congressman Paul will win. 37 Comments (0 topical, 37 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
RonPaul™ off as a conservative.
Almost.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.
Silly? Ron Paul is hands down the most conservative candidate in this race. I understand that the ideals exposed by the framers of the constitution have fallen into disuse but not everyone has sold out to socialist style big government.
My notion of silliness is to support an actor/lobbyist who pays lip service to federalism while pushing for CFR to limit free speech and is now comparing himself to George Washington on his campaign site bio. Wow what an ass.
The Ames Straw poll has traditionally been the place where conservatives start circling their wagons around a specific candidate. Scott Reed is correct. Candidates need to show they can win before thinking they can have the nomination. The trio of cowards who skipped the straw poll will just have to prove themselves in some other way. Most likely they will just not get the nomination though.
tinfoil brigade when the founders were busy founding. They would have either hung him, stoned him, tarred & feathered him or fed him to the Barbary Pirates and we wouldn't have to listen to this stupidity.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.
Chad
So will Ron Paul be sending in copies of the results to Moveon.org as he prepares to run as an independent (sort of kind of) canidate? Maybe Sorros won't need copies of the results.
_______________________________
None of the Above !
FAKE!
He is Mr. Opportunist. I think that he, like Hillary, has been running for this office since college. He seem to be a guy who wakes up and asks a consultant "what's the position du jour?"
WE dont need a guy like him at a time like this!
Lets hope that the Republicans dont hand over the keys to the party to this RINO!
I have no problem with Ron Paul's supporters spending their money trying to get him a win.
They come across as pretty nutty. If this lowers their spendable funds and helps the Iowa GOP raise some money to help real candidates....I say go for it.
by getting him better national name recognition. I don't really know what his name recognition is now.
Romney will hence forth be known as "Daddy War Bucks" who can buy any straw poll with his money.
This will be great name recognition for the non-political junkies out there. The rest of us already know "Flipper".
_______________________________
None of the Above !
No better than it was several months ago. Among Republican primary voters, it's around half. It was even less in Ohio and Pennsylvania, according to recent state polls linked on realclearpolitics.com. Fred Thompson's was about the same.
I don't think ANYTHING will get the attention of a 40-50 percent block of Republican primary voters, even the ones who claim to be following the candidates' positions closely.
If Democrats and Independents can vote in the straw poll, I really wouldn't be shocked if Ron Paul gets second.
Reading the Iowa GOP's website, it only appears that they will check to see if the person is an Iowa resident, and will not check the voter's party affiliation. (Maybe Iowa doesn't have party affiliation on voter registrations?)
Paul has more money than anyone outside the top tier, he has a rabid base, and no one but Romney is above 10% in the polls I've seen.
Remember, we're only talking about 25,000 people here. All Paul would have to do is get 2,500 anti-war/libertarian voters the entire state of Iowa to show up and fork over $35 to get 10% in the poll.
Paul getting second in the straw poll sounds like a very plausible scenario to me personally, if the caucus is open to Iowa's Democrats and Independents and not just Republicans.
Just my opinion.
And hence the central problem with these silly exercises in personality contests.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.
a registered Republican and eligible to vote in Iowa.
Shane Vander Hart
Check out my blog - Caffeinated Thoughts.
I think that this may be a case of a misquote or mis-spoke.
The way I see it. If Romney loses the poll it's a big blow. If he wins the poll by less than 10% it is a small but significant setback (except if Guiliani finishes 2nd).
If Romney wins by more than 20% it's a big win.
My reasoning is this. The other "top-tier" have sat this one out.
If Romney wins and Guiliani takes second all the story will be about how Guiliani took second. Romney will be the B story- but I think it could rapidly develop into a Romney vs Guiliani meme of the Republican race. (With Guiliani the frontrunner). This would be good for Romney as the campaigns of the other social conservative candidates will likely wither and die. Leaving the race between Romney (Social conservative) and Guiliani. (Of course Thompson getting in the race will change this again). The negative is that Guiliani may decide to focus more effort on winning Iowa which would mess Romney's plans up.
If Romney wins by more than 10% and Huckabee and Brownback take 2nd and 3rd, then Iowa will become a race to decide who the conservative candidate is- with the winner facing off against Guiliani. It becomes more likely that GUiliani will not make as big a play for Iowa and will focus more on Florida- which is a positive for Romney- but now he has to worry about the other social conservatives- including Fred Thompson as he won't be able to lock those votes down.
If he wins by less than 10% the case is similar be less friendly to Mitt's chances (thought he wouldn't be out of the race). If Mitt wins by more than 20% he might be able to cripple the other Social Conservatives and keep Guiliani from making a strong play for Iowa.
No matter what, Ames won't decide the Republican race, but it will change the ground that the top-tier candidates are fighting on, and will change what the odds are.
So I wonder if the person being quoted above might have mis spoke, or been misquoted. Perhaps he meant 10 points- meaning 10 percentage points, as that would make sense.
The day you pay $35.00 to vote in the general election, Ames will mean something. Until then, it's nothing more than made up bs by the candidates (who can pay $35/vote) and the Chamber of Commerce in IA.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.
at the history, but any event where you gather 40,000 people together to vote can be a pretty good indicator how well that person will do in at least the Iowa Caucus.
Shane Vander Hart
Check out my blog - Caffeinated Thoughts.
prom queen contest. Along with all of the other caucuses, I'm not just picking on IA, I'm picking on caucuses in general.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.
mbecker
I seem to recall that Ames and the straw poll used to be an early test of a candidates staff and how well they could organize an event. Money in the case of the Romney camp has obviously warped things a bit. It's now look at how much money I can spend to win a meaningless straw poll.
I actually think Romney's camp is making a big mistake in going large and spending so much money to win these straw polls, people are not fooled, and in some ways turned off.
_______________________________
None of the Above !
come in second. He hasn't been campaigning nearly as hard as other candidates in Iowa. He has been running a national campaign, and that will hurt him in the long run.
Shane Vander Hart
Check out my blog - Caffeinated Thoughts.
fourth or worse.
His attitude seems to be "screw Iowa", I can win in New York, California, and Florida.
Well, if the last 20 years are any kind of guide, Giuliani had better put some energy into Iowa. After Iowa, Kerry was able to lock up what had been seen as a Dean-leaning New Hampshire.
Bush turned an Iowa win in 2000 into a GOP nomination, just as Bob Dole did in 1996.
Giuiliani has to get off his butt and grab a hog or two if he wants to win the nomination.
Romney/Thompson 2008
The collapsed primary schedule will likely render any result from IA and from NH more or less moot. In the past there was IA and NH and then nothing for months and the press filled the void with speculation based on those results. in 2000, SC got tossed into the mix and became "important".
With reference to the candidates you highlight, Kerry didn't so much "lock up" anything as Dean just imploded. Remember "Arrrrrrrrrrrrrgggggggggggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh"? Dole would have had to have dropped over dead on the campaign trail to not get the '96 nomination. He was the sacrificial lamb tossed into the arena for the crowds to laugh at. And in 2000, Bush was the recipient of McCain's implosion in SC, it had absolutely nothing to do with IA or NH, both of which should really be viewed as outliers. IA because McCain didn't show up (couldn't get Dem crossover and Indies to caucus) and NH because McCain won as a result of crossover that wasn't going to happen anywhere else (and won't happen this time either).
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.
It is also possible that one candidate could build up so much steam before super-Tuesday as to be effectively unstoppable. To some extent, that is what happened with Kerry.
Iowa and New Hampshire are not sufficient for this. Someone will have to roll out of those states and win all or nearly all of the other pre-super-Tuesday states.
Of course, if there are still two or three candidates standing by super-Tuesday, and someon 'enters' the race at that point, we could see the sort of race that we political nerds love so much - all the way to the convention. (As I may have written before).
Quentin Langley
Editor of http://www.quentinlangley.net
International Editor of
about Kerry. And I'm guessing it's mostly a semantical quibble. I don't think Kerry so much built up a head of steam, as that Dean imploded and showed that he wasn't a player on the national scene and Kerry was the recipient of the implosion.
I also think that Dean just imploded first. Kerry managed to hold off until the general election.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.
But Gephardt, Edwards and Clark all got beaten the old-fashioned way: one state at a time.
Quentin Langley
Editor of http://www.quentinlangley.net
International Editor of
Are you sure you're not just trying to mold the facts to fit the press storylines that have been promulgated over the years?
I don't see a win in Iowa changing people's minds, I don't see it having TIME to influence fundraising by much, and I don't see it giving a significant delegate lead.
So I don't know what this 'steam' effect is supposed to be, heh.
_Are you sure you're not just trying to mold the facts to fit the press storylines that have been promulgated over the years?_
Yes, I am sure. I think it is pretty clear that early primaries *do* affect people's judgements. It is not so much that people change their minds - they are only likely to do that if part of their judgement is tactical. It is that many people have not yet made up their minds. Many people do so at the last minute or in the last few days before their own state votes. It can also affect turnout.
There is a reason the main election is on one day. There is also a reason why it is considered bad form to concede, as Carter did, when some states are still voting. News of voting from one state can affect voting in others. I was engaged in GOTV in the last hours of 2000 on the West Coast, and the news that the MSM had 'called' Florida for Gore depressed GOP turnout on the West Coast. Uncalling it equally helped GOP turnout.
Quentin Langley
Editor of http://www.quentinlangley.net
International Editor of
I dislike his policies, but I do respect that he's keeping his eyes on the prize: having enough delegates to control the convention.
It's that kind of thinking that you HAVE to have in order to win the Electoral Votes it takes to win the Presidency, after all.
I actually disagree with you on Ames.
You ask this question:
I'm not certain how a $35/vote "straw poll" in a small, Midwestern State translates into anything whatsoever to do with social conservatives
The answer to your question is two fold:
1) Ames has in the past been a place where candidates end their races. Tommy Thompson, Sam Brownback, Ron Paul, Mike Huckabee -- all need to finish 2nd in Ames. Three of them won't. Two of those three will likely end their campaign. Their people (meaning people who support them at the caucus) are going to go looking for a new candidate and the Ames winner will get that lion's share.
2) Romney is looking to win the presidency the old fashioned way: With momentum. The person who wins Ames usually wins the Iowa caucuses. The person who wins the Iowa caucuses helps themself in New Hampshire (where Romney alredy leads in the polls). The person who wins both of those usually takes South Carolina. Kerry won the nomination with an Iowa / NH sweep. Romney is looking to do the same. There are conservatives who are uncomfortable with Romney, but when faced with a potential two horse race of Romney or Guiliani coming out of New Hampshire, they are going to decide that Romney, with momentum, and a change in abortion position to pro-life is a better candidate than Guiliani and his non-change on life / gay marriage.
Brownback and Huckabee just need to stay close to one another, and ahead of the other 2nd/3rd tier candidates, to stay in the race. Thompson will drop out if he's 4th or worse, and Ron Paul's not going anywhere. He'll stay in the race if he's dead last, because he's not running to win.
______________________________________
"Our job is to bash the president"
Newsweek's Evan Thomas, on the role of the MSM
for '88, '92, '96... not now.
Coming out of New Hampshire? The primary schedule right now, after the latest spate of revisions, puts New Hamphsire betwixt her and there immediately before the other place. Who cares anymore? There's tradition, yes, but the weight is gone. Old formulae have been rewritten and must still be revised on the fly.
This Straw Poll, in August of '07, will be an amusing talking point by September. Someone might say, "Yes, but Romney won the Iowa straw poll in August, and..." The reply will be: "We're campaigning in Florida, you idiot."
There will be artificial boasting rights, of course, and I will enjoy reading various campaigns spinning success out of this thing. It won't matter a whit, but it's something to do in August. It's a nifty fundraiser for the Iowa GOP, and there is great food. Some will claim success, others might use it as an excuse to change plans, whatever.
Romney should be actively campaigning in Florida and South Carolina.
There was a time when McCain had to use political ties to Governor Crist to keep the Florida GOP from taking a poll at its convention that Romney was expected to win. Those days are gone. Giuliani seems to have opened up a lead in Florida.
Romney has to do something there, and quick.
Romney/Thompson 2008
He's been pretty active in both of those states. It's simply harder to make a dent in Florida because of size.
a bunch of nobodys who can't gain national or even regional traction on any issue with a group large enough to get out of single digits get their wake up call and drop out. Well, I guess that's something. Not much, but something.
Let's hope that the Party sets up some kind of structure for '12. This is just silly.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.
because of who loses, not because of who wins. It will help thin the field.
The best Romney gets out of it is that it could maintain, or even slightly enhance, his momentum going into the Iowa caucuses. The worst is that it could embarrass him.
But there is a real chance that Huckabee, Brownback or Tommy Thompson will drop out. In fact, I am sure Thompson will, and one of the other two may well join him. That is a real win for the survivor.
Quentin Langley
Editor of http://www.quentinlangley.net
International Editor of
since they aren't running. They might win, but they cannot lose. Their supporters are involved in the process, but neither man has invested time, effort or money in the process.
Mitt, on the other hand, has invested much effort. With all of the attention given to Mitt's spending, he can't really win, but he can definitely lose. Anything less than a huge win is a loss for Romney.
Brownback, Huckabee, (T)Thompson,even McCain are going to lose this faux poll, or at least 3 of them will. McCain may not be running, but more bad news will tend to be fatal. Rudy and Fred are not running, either, but their supporters are still involved. If Rudy and Fred get good numbers without campaigning, and McCain gets diddly, then he will sink beneath relevancy.
If Rudy, Fred and Mitt take 1st, 2nd, and 3rd, all 4 of the bottom tier are toast. They are browning quite nicely now, but they will be done.
The real winner will be whoever picks up their supporters in the national effort. Suppose 3, or even all 4, of the bottom tier drop out. Each has 3-9% right now. Average 4 point each, 16 points total. 16 points ending up in someone's else's column pretty much settles it. Even 12 points may be the decider.
Rudy has solid support. He has staked out positions on social and defense issues, and he has not wavered. Unless something really drastic happens, he won't lose any points, but he won't pick up much more, either. I think Rudy tops out at about 30-35 points in the end. That's VP territory, not POTUS territory. Could be wrong, but I only see Rudy as the candidate if Fred does not run, or if Fred stumbles. Rudy has a lot of respect, even from detractors. Mitt does not.
Mitt's movement has been glacially slow. He had moved all the way from 9 points to 13 points. For all of the talk and money, he hasn't really made any progress. I don't see him picking up a lot of points from those who drop out.
I know that Fred has officially been pronounced DOA by the Romney camp, but, if he runs, Fred is the winner. He picks up the numbers from the bottom tier when he announces. People who support Huckabee or Brownback are not so likely to support Mitt or Rudy. Ditto McCain supporters.
If Fred actually wins Iowa, or even comes in 2nd, without campaigning, it would be a great opportunity for him to announce his candidacy. Probably won't happen, but it's not out of the question.
I live in constant fear that Ron Paul will actually come out of this poll very strongly. But if the Ron the Mighty doesn't pull it off (from my mouth to God's ear), then the Republican party is safe for the time being.
1. I really hesitate to say that anybodys support is "solid" at this juncture. Maybe you could intimate that about RonPaul™, because he IS the messiah, or Brownback because he's the "pro-life, single issue" guy, but I don't see much in the way "feet in concrete" support for anybody. I think most people (not us) aren't paying attention to much beyond getting their kids back to school right now, and those who are paying some attention have sort of narrowed the field down to a couple of candidates.
2. Fred... won't be effected one way or another by anything that happens in Ames, unless he wins. Same for Rudy. And even then, the bump and the excitement will last for the better part of two days. Maybe.
3. RonPaul™ could do pretty well here. Which is the whole problem with these stupid prom-queen contests. All you really need to do well (relatively speaking) is some really motivated followers and a little money. He's got both. He's certainly not going to win - Romney has more of both - but I wouldn't be real shocked if he came in second or in the top four.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.
...I'm not exactly taking his word on determining someone's conservative credentials.